The roots of the current
political crisis in Bhutan and the refugees lie in Bhutan’s geopolitics and
population politics. A study of various policies of the Royal Government of
Bhutan (RGOB) in the last two decades reflects the Ngalung/Drukpa dominated
government’s motive to uproot Nepali speaking Lhotshampa population from
Bhutan and reduce their number by all means. Be it Drukpanization or
Bhutanization programmes, Citizenship and Marriage Acts or NOCs/PCCs, all
are directed against Lhotshampas of the south. It was a long standing and
intrinsic ruling elites’ security perception that the domestic demand for
political change (democracy) would come from the Lhotshampas in the south.
The south is bordered by the democratic India. Moreover, the Lhotshampas
are economically well-off and more educated than their brethren in the
north and east. The northern borders with China is closed. In order to
pre-empt the demand for democracy, the government devised a clever strategy
to depopulate the Lhotshampas from southern Bhutan. Hence, the Lhotshampas
suddenly became the geopolitical scapegoats and security threat to the
absolute monarchy.

Thus, the government
devised various strategies to bring about a favourable demographic balance
favouring a Drukpa/Ngalung nation by reducing the number of Lhotshampas to
around 25% and to prevent the demand for democracy from southern Bhutan. The
failed implementation of the forced assimilation policies reinforced this
insecurity. This resulted in denationalization, deprivation and virtual
confiscation. of Lhotshampa citizenship rights through manipulation of the
Citizenship Act and through changing the definition of citizenship. The
current political crisis and the refugee problems owe their origin to the
enactment of two racist and discriminatory laws, viz., Citizenship Act of
1985 and Marriage Act of 1977 and implementation of a number of racist and
discriminatory policies. These laws and policies were designed to reduce the
number of Lhotshampa population and their mass eviction.

CITIZENSHIP ACT

Question of nationality and
methods employed to determine citizenship form a backdrop of all other
issues and events in southern Bhutan. Bhutan’s first attempt to define its
citizenship came with National Law of Bhutan, 1958. The regime enacted a new
Citizenship Act, 1985. This Act was given a retrospective implementation of
thirty years, that is, from 1958. It declared 31 December, 1958 as the
cut-off year for granting citizenship. The Act was forcefully implemented in
1988. The wives of Bhutanese citizens married from outside the country and
children born of such parents were not granted citizenship and were deprived
of their legitimate citizenship status. This Act defined three criteria for
granting of citizenship: by birth, by registration, and through
naturalisation.

This Act is the origin of
the refugee problems and the looming danger of statelessness for Lhotshampas.
The National Law, 1958 prescribed 'fatherhood' as the criteria for granting
citizenship-which is normal. But the new Act repealed the previous
citizenship law and prescribed 'parenthood' as the sole criteria for grant
of citizenship by birth, thus denying citizenship to anyone whose mother was
married from outside the country, even if the mother was granted citizenship
according to previous law. Since the Act was given a retrospective
implementation of 1958, all children born of a marriage between a Bhutanese
father and a non-Bhutanese mother, between 1958 to 1988 were declared
non-citizens and so-called 'illegal’ and 'economic migrants'. The National
Assembly in1988 confirmed 14,442 marriages between a Bhutanese citizen and a
non-citizen during last twenty years. The number was too insignificant for
the government to grant citizenship rights.

Article 3 of the Act
codified a new basis for granting citizenship - a proof of residence in
Bhutan since before December 31, 1958 was required. It says that “ A person
permanently domiciled in Bhutan on or before 31st December, 1958, and, whose
name is registered in the census register maintained by the Ministry of Home
Affairs shall be deemed to be a citizen of Bhutan by registration”. The
government subsequently brought all Lhotshampas under the purview of
citizenship by registration only. They were considered citizens by
registration and not by birth, even though they were born and reared in
Bhutan since the 17th century much before the establishment of
the current ruling Wangchuchk dynasty in 1907 and granted citizenship by
previous laws.

DE-NATIONALIZATION

The Act arbitrarily imposes
an impossible burden upon the Lhotshampas of providing the documentary
evidence of their presence in Bhutan on 31 December, 1958, while the other
ethnic groups did not have to prove anything to retain their citizenship.
The government insisted on production of documents such as land tax
receipts only of 1958. Documents of earlier years including the citizenship
certificates issued on the basis of previous laws were arbitrarily rejected.
The proper census record maintained by Chief District Officer were
arbitrarily rejected. The government was fully aware that the requirements
of the new Act just did not exist then in Bhutan and that most of the
Lhotshampas would not be able to fulfil them. The Act demands that the
person concerned must prove that his name was registered in the census
register, though the register was maintained by the government. The
government demand is not only ridiculous but totally unjustified since, the
Council of Ministers including the Ministry of Home responsible for
maintaining the census register was itself created in 1968. The enumeration
in the census record was started only in 1972.

Following the first census
of 1981, all citizens were issued with citizenship identity cards. The
Foreigners were issued with alien cards and the non-national labours were
issued with contract permits. By 1982 all people in Bhutan were registered.
Bhutanese government initially claimed that any documentary evidence
whatsoever, land ownership deeds or documents showing sale, gift, and
inheritance of land, tax receipts of any kind etc., showing that the person
concerned was resident in Bhutan in 1958 is taken as conclusive proof of
citizenship. But later the government contended that payment of property
tax in itself is hardly a proof of Bhutanese citizenship. This is especially
unfair since some of the documentary proof required by the census team just
did not exist in the year 1958, i.e., enumeration in the census records.

Those who could not produce
the documentary evidence of their presence on 31 December, 1958 were
declared illegal immigrants. How is it possible for illiterate villagers to
keep documents that will be demanded by the government after 30 years.
Moreover, government had already issued citizenship certificates to all
Lhotshampas making the safe keeping of the documents unimportant. The Act
was also discriminatorily enforced against the Lhotshampas and not at all
against other ethnic groups. Many Ngalungs have Italian, English, Chinese
and Singaporean wives, but they do not have to prove anything. However, the
law prescribes a number of discriminatory criteria against the wives of
Lhotshampas from Nepal or India and their children. They are treated at par
with aliens seeking for naturalisation.. Under the naturalisation process,
these wives must prove their prior residence of 15-20 years in Bhutan. A
child born of such mothers needs to reach the age of fifteen when he/she
may apply for naturalisation. Naturalization again, is not a matter of law
but subject to government approval

The Act was
applied in an arbitrary manner to create mass statelessness. The dissidents
accused of speaking or criticising the king’s government was stripped of
citizenship. Many Lhotshampas were deprived of their nationality for having
fled Bhutan to escape suppression, because their fleeing amounts to
disloyalty to the state according to the regime. The Act enabled the
government to claim that the refugees are not Bhutanese citizens. The
authorities confiscated the documentary evidences, particularly the
citizenship identification card and land documents issued to them by the
government. It was a well planned strategy and conspiracy of the government
to depopulate and reduce the number of Lhotshampas. No appeal on the subject
was allowed. The Act also forbids the return of citizens leaving the
country. Since the government alleges that refugees have voluntarily
emigrated to Nepal, their return will not be possible until this Act is
repealed. Even, the European Parliament’s resolution has urged Bhutan to
amend this Act for the return of refugees.

MARRIAGE LAWS

After enacting a draconian
Citizenship Act in 1985 to reduce the Lhotshampa population, the government
simultaneously introduced the new Marriage Act which had an even larger
content of discrimination against Lhotshampa women and their children. The
Act declared all foreign wives of the Bhutanese citizens as non-citizens,
even though most of them were granted citizenship under previous citizenship
laws. In contravention of all international norms and civilised behaviour,
the Royal Government denied several thousand children (born out of
marriages between Lhotshampa husbands and Nepali speaking wives from Nepal
or India) of their right to nationality. They were evicted along with their
parents. This Act was only enforced against the Lhotshampas.

The Marriage Act was
enacted in 1980 and was forcefully implemented in 1988 to especially target
the wives of Lhotshampas. This discriminatory law imposes a number of
denial of benefits to those who married non-Bhutanese wives. The
Lhotshampas who married non-Bhutanese wife did not have the right to vote in
(became ineligible for election to) the National Assembly (Parliament)
elections, they were to be denied promotion in civil services, denied
training and fellowships and medical treatment abroad, they were also denied
business and agricultural grants and loans given by the government and could
not avail of government supplied fertilisers, seeds and farm machineries on
subsidies. They could not get jobs in the Foreign Service and Armed Forces.
This posed enormous problems for the Lhotshampas.

There are many reasons as
to why the Lhotshampa chose foreign wives of their own ethnic groups from
Nepal and India. Some reasons are enumerated as follows: Bhutan stepped out
of its isolation in the mid-sixties. The government did not encourage
cultural socialization of various ethnic groups. Some ethnic groups were not
allowed to own properties in the Ngalung dominated areas. Even in-country
migration and in-country travel were restricted for some ethnic groups. The
transport and communications were also not developed. This led to the
cultural isolation of various ethnic groups. Thus, each ethnic group
developed their own intra-ethnic group matrimonial alliances.

Lhotshampas had a wide
ethnic area in Darjeeling, Sikkim and Nepal to choose their spouse from. As
a result many Lhotshampas got their spouses from their own ethnic groups
from these places. The most important factor that prevented the
encouragement of inter-ethnic group matrimonial alliances is culture. The
Lhotshampas are by and large Hindus. Culturally and traditionally, they are
entirely different from ruling Ngalungs. Their language is a dialect of or
is derived from Sanskrit, the oldest language. They prefer to live in the
hot climate of the southern foot hills. The Ngalungs are nurtured in Drukpa
Kargyupa Buddhist culture. They speak Tibetan stock Dzonkha language which
is entirely different from Nepali. They wear robe like dresses and prefer to
live in cool climate of the north.

While strict cultural
values of the Lhotshampas triggered the search for wives from outside
Bhutan, limited domestic society and geography also facilitated such
marriages. The lack of communication and infrastructure within Bhutan were
also factors which made Lhotshampas get their wives from neighbouring Indian
states and Nepal as it was easier to travel to neighbouring countries than
to visit other districts of Bhutan. Because of the lack of roads, Bhutanese
are still required to travel through India to reach from east to west in
the south and south to north. Darjeeling district had excelled as a centre
of education during the British rule in India. It is still regarded as the
best place for education in the entire region of Bhutan, Nepal and
Northeast India.

Jesuit fathers and
Christian missionaries established the best schools in Darjeeling. Due to
the absence of good schools and colleges throughout the sixties,
seventies and the eighties in Bhutan, the government used to send young
Bhutanese for studies to Darjeeling on Indian government scholarships. Most
Lhotshampa students married with their schoolmates of their own ethnic
community from Darjeeling, Sikkim and Nepal.. Bhutan does not have enough
colleges to cater to the need of students. Its only college is affiliated
with Delhi University. Bhutanese students had to go to Darjeeling as it is
less expensive to study in neighbouring Darjeeling than in Delhi or
Calcutta.

As a consequence of
increasing developmental activities after 1960 more opportunities were
being created for educated people in the government services and in the
private sector. Bhutan had a very low female literacy rate. The available
manpower was not sufficient to meet the demand. As a result, educated
Lhotshampa took educated and conscious wives of their own ethnicity from
neighbouring countries, who could work in the offices or do businesses and
earn money.

In 1988, the government
reported of 11,442 marriages between Bhutanese and non-Bhutanese during the
preceding 20 years. There was neither a Marriage Act or Citizenship Laws
forbidding a Bhutanese marrying a foreign wife then. The laws were enacted
later with retroactive effect. Had there been such laws, probably no
Bhutanese would have married a foreign spouse. The Royal Government’s
senseless action of implementing these laws shows its irresponsibility and
indifference towards its citizens’ difficulties. It is a well-planned
conspiracy to depopulate southern Bhutan. In any case, marriage is too
personal a matter for the state to intervene.

Both the Citizenship Act
and the Marriage Act are racist, biased and discriminatory against
Lhotshampa of southern Bhutan. Moreover, the law is also implemented in a
discriminatory manner; very rigidly against the Lhotshampas and not at all
against Drukpas, who for example have a Chinese, English, Italian or
American wives. For example, Mr. Ugen Tshering, a Drukpa married to an
Italian wife in the early eighties has today been promoted as Foreign
Secretary. Similarly, the then Chief Justice of the High Court was promoted
even though he had an English wife. Today, of course, aside from bringing
about a denial of benefits, marriage to non-Bhutanese wife has resulted in
the very denial of citizenship rights to the Lhotshampa husbands.

Both the Citizenship Law,
1985 and the Marriage Acts have stripped several thousand Lhotshampas of
their nationality. As a consequences of not granting citizenship to the
foreign wives of Lhotshampa husbands, more than 60,000 children were
deprived of their rightful claim to Bhutanese citizenship. This is more than
20 percent of the total children population of Bhutan. Refugee children
constitute about 10 percent of the country’s total population of around
700,000 of Bhutan.

More than 10,000 Lhotshampa
wives are deprived of their right to nationality. The government must
repeal the discriminatory Citizenship Act, 1985 and the Marriage Act. It
must enact new citizenship and marriage laws conforming to the
international standards, and protect the right to nationality of all its
citizens. “The 1985 Citizenship Act of Bhutan contains a number of vague
provisions, and appears to have been applied in an arbitrary manner. It also
contains provisions which could be used to exclude from citizenship many
people who are not members of the dominant ethnic group, as well as those
who oppose Government policy by peaceful means” according to Amnesty
International’s report, “Bhutan : Forcible Exile”, August, 1994.